Israel Matzav

Pawlenty blasts Obama's UN gambit

Republican Presidential contender Tim Pawlenty (Minn) has blasted the Obama administration's 11th hour gambit to turn a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel into a 'Presidential statement' condemning Israel. Fortunately, the 'Palestinians' have apparently once again taken the opportunity to miss an opportunity by declining the American offer, and the US may yet veto the resolution. But Pawlenty still recognizes that Obama is wrong.

Pawlenty said in an emailed statement:

The Obama administration has shown an astonishing unwillingness to stand by Israel at the United Nations, an organization with a long history of blaming Israel for just about every problem in the Middle East. It’s time for our UN ambassador to finally show some leadership, draw a line in the sand, and defend our historic ally. Global stability depends more than ever on a respected America that is loyal to our allies and realistic about the malice of our adversaries.

Lazy Susan show leadership? You've got to be kidding....

Jennifer Rubin adds:

Pawlenty is exactly right. Because this administration does not want to do what its predecessors did -- exercise the Security Council veto to shield Israel from one-sided resolutions seeking to isolate the Jewish state in the international community -- it instead has offered to join the pack of jackals that seek, at best, to extract concessions and impose a deal on Israel and, at worst, delegitimize Israel.

An A.P. report echoing the whimpering of the administration contends that since the offer of "compromise" was rejected the administration is in "difficult position." Only this administration would consider it difficult to stand with its ally and rebuff Palestinian efforts to advance their position without concessions or even participation in the "peace process."

As of now, the State Department isn't talking. But after belatedly promising to veto an anti-Israel resolution, it is hard to see this as anything other than a bait-and-switch by the administration. So far, there has been not a peep out of AIPAC or other mainstream American Jewish organizations that have again and again excused the administration's efforts to distance the U.S. from Israel.

The U.S. and Israel were saved, in some sense, by the obtuseness and maximalist demands of Israel's foes who declined the "compromise." (And why should they do any differently? Why stop at just a "compromise," when there is so much more they might gain from their friends in the White House?) But the damage is done. Once again, Israel's foes, most especially Iran, can see the daylight between the administration and Israel. How would Israel's opponents not be emboldened by the administration's behavior?

Indeed. The silence from the Jewish organizations is deafening. I guess they're afraid of being seen as supporting the 'settlements.' Get used to it guys. There isn't going to be peace here in your lifetime or mine. The 'Palestinians' won't compromise. And we won't commit suicide by giving up those 'settlements.'

There is one Democrat who got it right: Anthony Weiner (NY).

This is too clever by half. Instead of doing the correct and principled thing and vetoing an inappropriate and wrong resolution, they now have opened the door to more and more anti-Israeli efforts coming to the floor of the U.N. The correct venue for discussions about settlements and the other aspects of a peace plan is at the negotiating table. Period.

John Tabin adds (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).

This is a moment of uncertainty in the Middle East, with a wave of protest movements threatening the stability of autocrats across the region. If this leads to the opening of Arab societies, that's a good thing in the long term (tyranny has bred radicalism; freedom is likely to breed moderation). But in the short term, a more democratic Arab world could be enormously destabilizating; people who have been fed decades of propaganda laden with Jew-hatred will be tempted to embrace a politics of confrontation with Israel. Maintaining Israel's ability to project strength is the best bet for maintaining peace -- Israel must be able to credibly say things like "You don't like Camp David? We'll be taking the Sinai back, then." This is no time to be shy about reminding the world the the US has Israel's back.

Indeed.

Labels: Anthony Weiner, Barack Obama, East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria construction, Susan Rice, Tim Pawlenty, UN Security Council

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 7:04 PM